Town Council Minutes' Format Matter
Dec. 2005 - Jan. 2006
Wethersfield, CT
Sokolowski Responds to Clerk's Jan. 18, 2006 FOI Request
byof
Sokolowski...
Sokolowski in turn Responds on Jan. 23, 2006
2006.01.23
Monday
EST 08:30 (UT/GMT: -05:00)
Dolores Sassano, Clerk
Town of Wethersfield
505 Silas Deane Highway
Wethersfield, CT 06109
Application of FOIA in/by Town of Wethersfield
Dear Mrs. Sassano,
Thank you for providing me with some of the information which I had requested in an earlier email as a FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act) request dated Dec. 29, 2005.
I do appreciate the effort which apparently went into your review, research and response to my request. I believe that ultimately the Town and the Public will be well served by this process of dialog and its outcomes.
Though you have the original document, a link to that request is provided:
http://www.wethersfield.net/html/gov/tow/counc/mins/0506format/kes-foi(3)-clerk-05c29.html
In that request, among other things, I had specifically asked for: "the number of days that such missing minutes are now in non-compliance with State regulations." According to your email, to which I am responding here, the Town is "not missing any of he minutes for the Boards and Copmmissions." Whether this was the status on the date of my request may be another matter. I will have to believe you; I am happy to learn that NO B&C in Wethersfield is nominally in FOIA-violation as of the date of your response, January 18, 2006. I have to believe too that the minutes under your direct care were indeed date-stamped when they are received in the Clerk's office. Can you say the same for those in remote, departmental locations? If they are not, why not? Are they not technically under the aegis of the Clerk's office too? If not, why not?
That "we have received the minutes in a timely manner" is couched in sufficiently vague terms that beg the question: are you as the Clerk referring to the Clerk's office proper or to ALL repositories for minutes in and for the Town of Wethersfield? If it is the former, that is not an adequate answer; if it is latter, a Clerk should have some recorded proof to make such a sweeping statement but,in this instance, you have chosen not to provide it. By NOT providing the itemized information as requested, your answer is incomplete. Please clarify this.
A formal complaint to the Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC), with subsequent hearings and demands for production of such proof, might be required. An audit of the date-stamped, received minutes for ALL of the B&C's for the Town, for one or more years, might be needed to ascertain the extent of purported compliance or actual non-compliance. If the reposited minutes lacked proof of date of actual receipt, sanctions might be imposed; these might include periodic (? annual) check-ups by the FOIC to assure future compliance.
More importantly, improved administrative oversight of such details regarding our publicly available municipal documents might be needed. Are written rules, regulations, or directives from the Town Clerk or Manager sent (and periodically re-issued) to ALL B&C's (and their officers) that outline for them the production and delivery requirements of minutes? I would like receive a copy of these. If such directives do not exist or have not been issued or re-issued periodically, why not? Also, If not, when will such be produced and distributed to all departments and Boards and Commissions?
In the Clerk's email of 12/30/2005, you reported:
"The minutes from Planning & Zoning, Zoning Board of Appeals, Inland Wetlands, Building Committee, Board of Building Appeals, Design Review Advisory Committee, Economic Development and Improvement Commission, Capital Improvements Advisory Committee [Jan, Feb & Mar only][sic], Conservation Commission, Flood and Erosion Control Board, Historic District Commission are not maintained in the office of the Town Clerk. They are maintained upstairs in Engineering/Building/Planning....Housing Authority [minutes are] is [sic] maintained at 55 Lancaster Road....Library [minutes are] is [sic] filed here as well as in the Library."
Though such a practice (of keeping minutes of B&C's meetings in multiple Town departments' offices) may be convenient for them, this does not absolve the Town Clerk of the overall responsibility for the preservation of those minutes. Does this arrangement comply with Connecticut General Statutes' (C.G.S.) requirements for such preservation and accountability? It would seem prudent for the Clerk to take posession of and responsibility for the originals of those minutes. The specific Town departments would merely keep a copy of them for their convenience. Having many people nominally responsible for the preservation of B&C's minutes drastically increases the likelihood of the minutes going AWOL.
In this day and age, there is absolutely no good reason for the Town Clerk to accept only a hardcopy of minutes. The Clerk should insist upon receiving, additionally, the minutes in electronic, digital form (CD's DVD's, floppy disks, flash memory cards/sticks, etc.), in a specified format (e.g. MsWord DOC format for unapproved minutes and Acrobat(R) PDF format for approved minutes). By submitting both a hardcopy and digital form to the Clerk's office, time will be saved, the website could be updated faster and also the 48-hour and 7-day requirements for public availability easily achievable. Accountability would be improved. With centralized collecting, collating, digitalizing (if need be), cataloguing and archiving of all of the minutes, they would have a better chance of being preserved and of being made available to the public more easily. Digitalized, this information could be easily shared with all of the departments and would be easily accessible to Library patrons via a dedicated computer terminal.
It should be of equal concern to the Town and to the Clerk that the FOIA details be followed, both to the letter and in the spirit of the law. The FOIA is clear that there are two stages in compliance: first the production of the "votes" (48 hours) and then the "minutes" (7 calendar days for regular meetings). Town's Attorney's (and Rocky Hill's) interpretation of the C.G.S FOIA statutes is seriously flawed. I had previously quoted the statute which, in part, read as follows:
"Sec. 1-225. (Formerly Sec. 1-21). Meetings of government agencies to be public. Recording of votes. Schedule and agenda of meetings to be filed. Notice of special meetings. Executive sessions. (a) The meetings of all public agencies, except executive sessions as defined in subdivision (6) of section 1-200, shall be open to the public. The votes of each member of any such public agency upon any issue before such public agency shall be reduced to writing and made available for public inspection within forty-eight hours and shall also be recorded in the minutes of the session at which taken, which minutes shall be available for public inspection within seven days of the session to which they refer."
I have NO problem whatsoever in the production of bare-bones motions and "votes" to meet the 48 hour requirement. But, please, don't be misled into believing nor be misleading by saying (as the Town of Rocky Hill has) that these two events and documents are one in the same and that "working notes" or other illegitimate creations are equivalent to true, traditional, appropriately detailed minutes.
No, "keeping a website up to date" is NOT difficult. It does however require commitment and time.
It is my hope to that the Town Council and the other Boards and Commissions will see the responsibility of complying with the FOIA as a civic responsibility and an opportunity to educate the public. It requires a vision and commitment to achieve it through the appropriation and application of financial and human resources. If the Town Council, the Town Administration, Board of Education and the other Boards and Commissions lack that vision and commitment, then our Republic will suffer as the public's educational and informational needs are neglected if not actually thwarted.
I certainly will continue this dialog and other efforts until this important public issue is resolved. Please respond to those items which I have highlighted by using bold font above. I am asking that this message be shared with the Town Manager, all members of the Town Council and the Town Attorney.
Respectfully,
Kenneth E. Sokolowski
Wethersfield, CT 06109
cc:
Bonnie L. Therrien
Wethersfield Town Council
John W. Bradley, Jr, Esq.
Pat Proctor
FOIC, State of Connecticut
